ArticleBMC public health2023
A coupled experimental and statistical approach for an assessment of SARS-CoV-2 infection risk at indoor event locations.
Article in BMC public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing strategies for the mitigation of SARS-CoV-2 airborne infection risk in tiered auditorium venues.Communications engineering · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Indoor event locations are particularly affected by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. At large venues, only incomplete risk assessments exist, whereby no suitable measures can be derived. In this study, a physical and data-driven statistical model for a comprehensive infection risk assessment has been developed. At venues displacement ventilation concepts are often implemented. Here simplified theoretical assumptions fail for the prediction of relevant airflows for airborne transmission processes. Thus, with locally resolving trace gas measurements infection risks are computed more detailed. Coupled with epidemiological data such as incidences, vaccination rates, test sensitivities, and audience characteristics such as masks and age distribution, predictions of new infections (mean), situational R-values (mean), and individual risks on- and off-seat can be achieved for the first time. Using the Stuttgart State Opera as an example, the functioning of the model and its plausibility are tested and a sensitivity analysis is performed with regard to masks and tests. Besides a reference scenario on 2022-11-29, a maximum safety scenario with an obligation of FFP2 masks and rapid antigen tests as well as a minimum safety scenario without masks and tests are investigated. For these scenarios the new infections (mean) are 10.6, 0.25 and 13.0, respectively. The situational R-values (mean) - number of new infections caused by a single infectious person in a certain situation - are 2.75, 0.32 and 3.39, respectively. Besides these results a clustered consideration divided by age, masks and whether infections occur on-seat or off-seat are presented. In conclusion this provides an instrument that can enable policymakers and operators to take appropriate measures to control pandemics despite ongoing mass gathering events.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.